Viewing 15 posts - 47,761 through 47,775 (of 59,102 total)
rgillings,
Thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it. If you really want to get a handle on that particular logic, take a gander at the article in the link I...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 5:21 am
amit (10/14/2008)
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 5:15 am
Heh... this has been a lot of fun, but the funny thing about this whole thing is that people keep talking about everything except the original post.
Yes, I agree that...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 14, 2008 at 5:05 am
You need to include the intial value of @j-2 in the @I loop or it just counts down in one iteration of @I and stays there.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 9:11 pm
You should tell us why you'll need nested While loops... typically, that's a recipe for a huge RBAR performance problem and it can usually be avoided. 😉
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 9:05 pm
:hehe:
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 8:53 pm
ayemya (10/13/2008)
I found a way to make it works. I have to close this question.
You should continue the question because you're still using a loop and a function to do...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 8:03 pm
You're trying to reinvent the wheel. 🙂 Use BCP or Bulk Insert, instead.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 8:02 pm
This is a "simple" :hehe: "running total" problem except instead of a running total that carries the previous balance of each row forward, we'll just carry the previous value of...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 7:57 pm
rgillings (10/13/2008)
I wouldn't feel right if I didn't offer a non-cursor alternative.
Heh... it's still RBAR on steroids, though. A cursor with Forward Only Read Only will be just as...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 7:45 pm
I believe you can add something like "Sort In TempDB" to your commands and only TempDB will change size, then. Lookup the reindexing commands you're using in Books Online...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Shree (10/13/2008)
Hi, do you think can we write without the XML?
Yep... see the following article...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Test+Data/61572/
Also, the folks in charge of the database have made a bloody huge error in not...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 7:27 pm
See the following for a basic "how to" and some pitfalls to avoid...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Test+Data/61572/
... and, in most cases, the biggest pitfall is the task itself. CSV data shouldn't be stored...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 7:16 pm
Greg Charles (10/13/2008)
The dollar sign isn't stored in SQL Server. If you need to display the money columns with the symbol, it should be applied in the application.
Heh... true...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 7:13 pm
DBADave (9/23/2008)
Sounds like our DBA team won't be able to offer any arguments against it.Thanks for the quick response.
Dave
Actually there is an argument against it. ...
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 13, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Viewing 15 posts - 47,761 through 47,775 (of 59,102 total)